Tor

Tor is an encrypted anonymising network that makes it harder to intercept internet communications, or see where communications are coming from or going to.

In order to use the WikiLeaks public submission system as detailed above you can download the Tor Browser Bundle, which is a Firefox-like browser available for Windows, Mac OS X and GNU/Linux and pre-configured to connect using the anonymising system Tor.

Tails

If you are at high risk and you have the capacity to do so, you can also access the submission system through a secure operating system called Tails. Tails is an operating system launched from a USB stick or a DVD that aim to leaves no traces when the computer is shut down after use and automatically routes your internet traffic through Tor. Tails will require you to have either a USB stick or a DVD at least 4GB big and a laptop or desktop computer.

Tips

Our submission system works hard to preserve your anonymity, but we recommend you also take some of your own precautions. Please review these basic guidelines.

1. Contact us if you have specific problems

If you have a very large submission, or a submission with a complex format, or are a high-risk source, please contact us. In our experience it is always possible to find a custom solution for even the most seemingly difficult situations.

2. What computer to use

If the computer you are uploading from could subsequently be audited in an investigation, consider using a computer that is not easily tied to you. Technical users can also use Tails to help ensure you do not leave any records of your submission on the computer.

3. Do not talk about your submission to others

If you have any issues talk to WikiLeaks. We are the global experts in source protection – it is a complex field. Even those who mean well often do not have the experience or expertise to advise properly. This includes other media organisations.

After

1. Do not talk about your submission to others

If you have any issues talk to WikiLeaks. We are the global experts in source protection – it is a complex field. Even those who mean well often do not have the experience or expertise to advise properly. This includes other media organisations.

2. Act normal

If you are a high-risk source, avoid saying anything or doing anything after submitting which might promote suspicion. In particular, you should try to stick to your normal routine and behaviour.

3. Remove traces of your submission

If you are a high-risk source and the computer you prepared your submission on, or uploaded it from, could subsequently be audited in an investigation, we recommend that you format and dispose of the computer hard drive and any other storage media you used.

In particular, hard drives retain data after formatting which may be visible to a digital forensics team and flash media (USB sticks, memory cards and SSD drives) retain data even after a secure erasure. If you used flash media to store sensitive data, it is important to destroy the media.

If you do this and are a high-risk source you should make sure there are no traces of the clean-up, since such traces themselves may draw suspicion.

4. If you face legal action

If a legal action is brought against you as a result of your submission, there are organisations that may help you. The Courage Foundation is an international organisation dedicated to the protection of journalistic sources. You can find more details at https://www.couragefound.org.

Submit documents to WikiLeaks

WikiLeaks publishes documents of political or historical importance that are censored or otherwise suppressed. We specialise in strategic global publishing and large archives.

The following is the address of our secure site where you can anonymously upload your documents to WikiLeaks editors. You can only access this submissions system through Tor. (See our Tor tab for more information.) We also advise you to read our tips for sources before submitting.

wlupld3ptjvsgwqw.onion

Copy this address into your Tor browser. Advanced users, if they wish, can also add a further layer of encryption to their submission using our public PGP key.

If you cannot use Tor, or your submission is very large, or you have specific requirements, WikiLeaks provides several alternative methods. Contact us to discuss how to proceed.

(b) and (d)
1. (S) SUMMARY. S/I Ambassador David Satterfield and
an MNF-I/Embassy Baghdad team met with SAG Foreign
Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal on May 10. While Iraq
was the main topic discussed, Saud brought up events
taking place in Beirut and emphasized the need for a
"security response" to Hizballah,s "military challenge to
the Government of Lebanon." Specifically, Saud argued for
an "Arab force" to create and maintain order in and around
Beirut, which would be assisted in its efforts and come under
the "cover" of a deployment of UNIFIL troops from south
Lebanon.
The US and NATO would need to provide movement and logistic
support, as well as "naval and air cover." Saud said that a
Hizballah victory in Beirut would mean the end of the Siniora
government and the "Iranian takeover" of Lebanon. END
SUMMARY.
Lebanon: A "Military" Problem with a Military Solution
--------------------------------------------- ---------
2. (S) Opening a discussion with S/I Satterfield focused
largely on Iraq, Saud first turned to Lebanon and stated that
the effort by "Hizballah and Iran" to take over Beirut was
the
first step in a process that would lead to the overthrow of
the
Siniora government and an "Iranian takeover of all Lebanon."
Such a victory, combined with Iranian actions in Iraq and on
the
Palestinian front, would be a disaster for the US and the
entire
region. Saud argued that the present situation in Beirut was
"entirely military" and that the solution must be military as
well. The Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) were too fragile to
bear
more pressure; they needed urgent backing to secure Beirut
from
Hizballah's assault. What was needed was an "Arab force"
drawn
from Arab "periphery" states to deploy to Beirut under the
"cover
of the UN" and with a significant presence drawn from UNIFIL
in
south Lebanon "which is sitting doing nothing." The US and
NATO
would be asked to provide equipment for such a force as well
as
logistics, movement support, and "naval and air cover."
3. (S) Satterfield asked what support this concept had from
Siniora and from other Arab states. Saud responded that
"Siniora strongly supports," but that only Jordan and Egypt
"as well as Arab League SYG Moussa" were aware of the
proposal,
lest premature surfacing result in its demise. No contacts
had been made with Syria on any Beirut developments, Saud
said,
adding, "what would be the use?"
An "Easier Battle to Win"
-------------------------
4. (S) Saud said that of all the regional fronts on which
Iran was now advancing, the battle in Lebanon to secure peace
would be an "easier battle to win" (than Iraq or on the
Palestinian front). Satterfield said that the "political and
military" feasibility of the undertaking Saud had outlined
would appear very much open to question. In particular,
attempting to establish a new mandate for UNIFIL would be
very problematic. Satterfield said the US would carefully
RIYADH 00000768 002 OF 002
study any Arab decision on a way forward. Saud concluded
by underscoring that a UN/Arab peace-keeping force coupled
with US air and naval support would "keep out Hezbollah
forever" in Lebanon.
5. (U) Ambassador Satterfield has cleared this cable.
FRAKER

Raw content

S E C R E T SECTION 01 OF 02 RIYADH 000768
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/12/2018
TAGS: IR, IS, IZ, LE, MASS, MCAP, MNUC, MOPS, PGOV, PINR,
PREL, SA
SUBJECT: LEBANON: SAG FM SAYS UN PEACE KEEPING FORCE NEEDED
NOW
Classified By: Deputy Chief of Mission Michael Gfoeller for reasons 1.4
(b) and (d)
1. (S) SUMMARY. S/I Ambassador David Satterfield and
an MNF-I/Embassy Baghdad team met with SAG Foreign
Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal on May 10. While Iraq
was the main topic discussed, Saud brought up events
taking place in Beirut and emphasized the need for a
"security response" to Hizballah,s "military challenge to
the Government of Lebanon." Specifically, Saud argued for
an "Arab force" to create and maintain order in and around
Beirut, which would be assisted in its efforts and come under
the "cover" of a deployment of UNIFIL troops from south
Lebanon.
The US and NATO would need to provide movement and logistic
support, as well as "naval and air cover." Saud said that a
Hizballah victory in Beirut would mean the end of the Siniora
government and the "Iranian takeover" of Lebanon. END
SUMMARY.
Lebanon: A "Military" Problem with a Military Solution
--------------------------------------------- ---------
2. (S) Opening a discussion with S/I Satterfield focused
largely on Iraq, Saud first turned to Lebanon and stated that
the effort by "Hizballah and Iran" to take over Beirut was
the
first step in a process that would lead to the overthrow of
the
Siniora government and an "Iranian takeover of all Lebanon."
Such a victory, combined with Iranian actions in Iraq and on
the
Palestinian front, would be a disaster for the US and the
entire
region. Saud argued that the present situation in Beirut was
"entirely military" and that the solution must be military as
well. The Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) were too fragile to
bear
more pressure; they needed urgent backing to secure Beirut
from
Hizballah's assault. What was needed was an "Arab force"
drawn
from Arab "periphery" states to deploy to Beirut under the
"cover
of the UN" and with a significant presence drawn from UNIFIL
in
south Lebanon "which is sitting doing nothing." The US and
NATO
would be asked to provide equipment for such a force as well
as
logistics, movement support, and "naval and air cover."
3. (S) Satterfield asked what support this concept had from
Siniora and from other Arab states. Saud responded that
"Siniora strongly supports," but that only Jordan and Egypt
"as well as Arab League SYG Moussa" were aware of the
proposal,
lest premature surfacing result in its demise. No contacts
had been made with Syria on any Beirut developments, Saud
said,
adding, "what would be the use?"
An "Easier Battle to Win"
-------------------------
4. (S) Saud said that of all the regional fronts on which
Iran was now advancing, the battle in Lebanon to secure peace
would be an "easier battle to win" (than Iraq or on the
Palestinian front). Satterfield said that the "political and
military" feasibility of the undertaking Saud had outlined
would appear very much open to question. In particular,
attempting to establish a new mandate for UNIFIL would be
very problematic. Satterfield said the US would carefully
RIYADH 00000768 002 OF 002
study any Arab decision on a way forward. Saud concluded
by underscoring that a UN/Arab peace-keeping force coupled
with US air and naval support would "keep out Hezbollah
forever" in Lebanon.
5. (U) Ambassador Satterfield has cleared this cable.
FRAKER